Stainback requested 21 photographs taken at the crime scene prior to the execution of a search warrant be supressed because they were not taken under the authority of a search warrant and thus in violation of Holden’s constitutional rights, court documents state.

The motion by Stainback also requested Holden’s cellphone and its contents should be supressed because he argued the cellphone was impermissibly obtained, according to court records.

In his order, Ridgeway states the crime scene photos were not in violation of the Fourth Amendment right against illegal search and seizure because an exception may apply where law enforcement are responding to an emergency, and there is not time to secure a warrant.

Ridgeway also argues the cellphone was obtained permissbly because it was handed over voluntarily by a third party during the execution of a lawful search warrant, court documents state.

The crime scene photos and cellphone will be included as evidence in the upcoming trial.